|
|
|
THEOLOGICAL ISSUE 1. By citing all of the biblical verses that connect the imagination with evil, are you saying that the imagination that you use in composing and arranging music is evil? You, along with every other person in the arts uses the imagination in the creation of their pieces whether sculpture, music, paintings, poems, and more. Inventors use their imaginations to create new products. Seamstresses use their imagination to buy material for a new garment. Children use their imaginations during play. As you have tried to explain, the Bible is key to understanding the influence of evil upon the imagination. The Old Testament does connect the imagination with evil, but the verses you cite are descriptive of people with unregenerated imaginations. From the Fall until Jesus' birth, life, death, and resurrection through today, evil imaginations--along with evil hearts and evil actions--describe the predicament of the human race. But Jesus Christ provides a way out of the predicament. Think with me a little. What does Jesus Christ redeem when we accept him as Savior? Just our spirits? Our souls? Our minds with its imaginations? RESPONSE: I address the question of imagination in earlier paragraphs. Regarding the Old Testament, being unregenerated was not describing some people but everyone who did not fear the Lord (which was most people). And except for Noah and his family, it was everyone who drowned in the Flood. But just because we have regenerated minds and imaginations does not give us license to use our imaginations to practice the very things we practiced with unregenerated minds, i.e., eastern meditation, vain repetition chants or mantras, your meaning of centering, etc.; or promote teachers who do practice these magic arts, such as Carl Jung and many others. If you want to know what we are to practice, then read what the Bible says about sanctification and Sound Doctrine and the narratives of how they REALLY meditated! And by the way, the New Testament connects imagination to evil too (see the verses I already sent you), such as the verse: "(For the weapons of our warfare are not carnal, but mighty through God to the pulling down of strong holds;) Casting down imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ;" 2 Corinthians 10:4-5, Our bodies? This is the message of the birth, life, death, and resurrection of the fully human Jesus Christ described in the New Testament: that he bought and paid for our whole beings--hearts, minds, bodies, souls, and spirits. Of course, a Christian's mind and imagination can be used to ill purposes. The verse you quote, 2 Corinthians 10:5, makes this very point. As regenerated humans (Christians) we are to bring every THOUGHT into obedience to Christ. This would be impossible if our minds with its imaginations were excluded from the process of redemption and sanctification. Taken to its logical conclusion, to say that all imagination is evil is to declare your own musical compositions evil. RESPONSE: If as you properly quote that we are to bring every thought into the obedience of Christ, then what place does DISOBEYING Christ by engaging in magic arts or quoting and promoting them that do? EXEGETICAL ISSUES
RESPONSE: Can't be understood huh? Is that what the Apostle Paul meant when he said: "For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, [even] his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:" Romans 1:20 Is that what the Apostle Paul meant when he said: "For we do not write you anything you can not read or understand" 2 Corinthians 2:13 NIV As that what the Apostle John meant when he said: "My little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not. And if any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous:" I John 2:1 Now if they could not "fully understand the entire context" of what John was saying, how would they understand how NOT to sin? Jesus Christ and the Apostle spend extensive discourse in warning about deception and false teaching. And with reference to the Last Days prophecies, they devote MORE text to deception (in the Church). If the Word is not clear or easily understood, how would we know how and when we are deceived? We must always remember that God's revelation of his purposes in history is "progressive". In other words, God reveals his plan for the redemption of humanity after the Fall a little bit at a time: through the life of Abraham and Sarah and their family, the Law, the nation of Israel, and so on. Determining the context of Scripture helps us avoid applying those Scriptures to our lives that aren't meant for us. RESPONSE: Are you suggesting that we don't need to flee from divination, astrology, paganism, necromancy, sorcery, mindless vain repetition prayers, centering down, magic arts just as much today and repent from practicing them just as much as in the time the Scriptures are recorded? That there are changes in the faith once and for all delivered to the Apostles that we are to no longer contend for? Paul warned the First Century Church about teaching things that ought not to be taught in his First Letter to Timothy then tells us the Second Letter to Timothy these very same doctrines of demons and seducing spirits, alive and well in the First Century, would visit us again in the Last Days. Both Isaiah and the Apostle Paul warn us that deception and wickedness would wax worse and worse. These warnings are clearly just as much for us today as believers. Finally, if you are so wary about what Scriptures say regarding false teaching and church discipline apply to us today, what hermeutical principles that you list did you use to determine that your version of meditation is even for today? For example, who among Christians would contend that we need to keep all of the Levitical laws and traditions? No one. They weren't written for that purpose. They were addressed to a particular people for a particular purpose in a particular time. As Christians we are to view the Mosaic Law as fulfilled in Jesus Christ and, as Paul writes to the church in Galatia, as "our tutor to lead us to Christ" (Gal. 3:24). RESPONSE: While there are some Christians today who attempt to keep Levitical laws and traditions (such as Seventh Day Adventists and some sects of Messianic Fellowships), we know that we are free from the legality of the Mosaic Law because of Christ's fulfillment. For that matter it was impossible to keep all the laws....no one ever did that...even at the time of the Levitical Priesthood. As you stated, the Scriptures clearly teach that Christ is the fulfillment of the Mosaic Law. However, there is nowhere in Scripture that we are given permission, however, to practice the meditative techniques that Richard Foster is promoting. "Days and diets" are negotiable, but doctrine and morals are essentials which do not have an expiration date. It is extremely ironic that you would quote Galatians in which Paul tells the Galatian Church that if anyone preach another gospel than what he first preached let him be eternally damned. Or are you going to tell me that this letter was intended only for the Galatians and only for the First Century, or to use your words: "for a particular purpose in a particular time?" No, once we are led to Christ, we cannot go back to the same practices we were delivered from. The same practices of magic arts that Jesus Christ himself declares in Revelation that no one who practices them will have a place inside of the New Jerusalem. If the magic arts are condemned in the First Century, and they are condemned up to the Last Days, how are they then acceptable practices in between, during the last two thousand years? Paul also said that his letters should be read to the other churches. So I guess that would mean they apply to them too! How useful is your long list of hermeneutical questions, if in the end in your words: "as citizens of the 21st century we can never fully understand the context of Scripture?" For the answers are fundamentally unknowable according to your argument. Yet you promote the idea that "meditation" is not only acceptable in the 21st Century, it is valuable to know God better. How did you determine that is for the 21st Century, for even after employing your schematic of hermeneutics, we are still not able to fully understand the context? How do you know, as you put it, that meditation is not just for a certain time and place in history? Well of course meditation is also for today, but that is Biblical meditation, not Eastern meditation. Now why didn't you apply your hermeneutics principles to the word "meditate" to find out what it really meant and its context throughout the Bible, before you use your imagination to interpret what the word means? Or worse, revise the meaning to allow you to imagine things for which there is no Biblical precedent or injunction to do so! You tout Biblical hermeneutics yet use revisionist exegesis and isagesis to force meaning into and out of the word that it NEVER possessed. You want me to use hermeneutics, something you think I fail to use properly or even understand? Well here is what the Contemplative Prayer Movement, Mysticism, and Gnosticism has done to the word meditate. This principle in hermeneutics is called "unwarranted expansion of a grammatical field". Or to put in in laymen's terms "using your imagination to invent a meaning and context of a word that is without justification." And here is another principle, or should I say actual Scripture that bears on this very subject: "Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet's own interpretation. For prophecy never had its origin in the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit. But there were also false prophets among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you. They will secretly introduce destructive heresies, even denying the sovereign Lord who bought them bringing swift destruction on themselves. 2 Peter 1:20 2:1 NIV By the way, Peter also warned, along with Jesus Christ, that the Last Days would be just like in the Days of Noah....same sins...same false teaching. Nothing new under the sun, as Solomon said!
RESPONSE: Well you repeat the same error....that evil imagination refers primarily to the Old Testament (see reference above which proves it is in the New Testament too!). The nature of man has not changed since the Fall of Adam. What are your saying? Even if there were only one Scripture in the New Testament in reference to imagination, that is all it takes to make it true. The word Trinity isn't even in there at all, but its concept is all through both Testaments and is a pillar of Orthodox Christianity! About the false teaching verses, of course there are false teachers. But who is to ferret them out and reprove them? The individual? The pastor? The gathered congregation? The Church? Reading the verses that you copied leaves the impression that individuals are to find and expose false teachers, but it is very clear from Scripture that anyone who is preaching false doctrine or bringing disgrace to the gathered community is to be exposed and disciplined in the midst of the body of Christ. RESPONSE: The answer to who ferrets our false teachers? Every Christian! We forfeited the right to remain silent the day we became Christians. Now at some point it may be only the elders who have the judicial or employer authority to actually fire or excommunicate such a false teacher. But any Christian can and should endeavor to identify them....based on all of the Scriptures I cited and sent to you earlier. All false teachers and false prophets need to be identified and opposed. And I am sure that we both agree that no one is to bring an accusation against an elder without the testimony of two or more. A host of discernment ministries around the world have already done this regarding Richard Foster (I will cite them at the end of this document). I also would like to submit that there are really four stages regarding "who" should do what regarding false teachers. They are: 1. Identifying, 2. Labeling (marking) 3. Disciplining, and 4. Restoration (if possible). Stage
One: Identifying False Teachers Stage
Two: Labeling (Marking) False Teachers Finally, and this is very important, there are false teachers who are clearly not Christians and there are those who either are Christians or profess that they are. If a pastor or teacher teaches false teaching, they are not immediately labelled or marked as false teachers....we all make mistakes. IT is only if they refuse correction, and ONLY after a second warning do you have the right to call them a false teacher. Peter promoted some false teachings, but would not be considered a false teacher because he repented. Richard Foster has been warned at least twice and still refuses to repent, so any Christian is perfectly within their rights to label or mark him as a false teacher and warn anyone considering his books or any church considering inviting him to speak. Here is the Biblical authority for you to take this action: "A man that is an heretick after the first and second admonition reject; Knowing that he that is such is subverted, and sinneth, being condemned of himself." Titus 3:10-11 Stage
Three: Disciplining False Teachers Of course the desired goal is that the false teacher repent and be restored to the congregation, not necessarily the pulpit. Elders can make this official. But all of the church can love and encourage a repentant false teacher. Now if such a false teacher is published, there would seem to be some need to make restitution or publish recantations to all they have caused to stumble. The Book of Philemon is one of the best examples of restoration of a believer (Paul's plea for Onesimus). But I can't think of one example in the Bible where a false teacher repented and was restored to the pulpit. The Apostle Peter would not qualify, for he never was removed from being an elder or Apostle. It never became necessary because he repented. Richard Foster has not.. A few more words on lone voice speaking out against spiritual or literal harlotry. If you have a situation in a church that even the Apostle Paul encountered when he records: A few more words on lone voice speaking out against spiritual or literal harlotry. If you have a situation in a church that even the Apostle Paul encountered when he records: I speak to your shame. Is it so, that there is not a wise man among you? no, not one that shall be able to judge between his brethren? I Corinthians 6:5 In such a scenario, you may have only one lone voice who is wise and discerning. Should this lone voice then remain silent because he is the only voice? You may end up without even one wise among that local church. But another church or another lone voice may exist who is wise and discerning. Should that person speak out, even though he is the lone voice? When Jesus asked when he returns will he find faith on the earth, wouldn't this imply a great falling away to the point that in many cities and churches you may very well only have one lone voice, or have to look elsewhere for one. Now of course it is much better if there is more than one voice and the testimony of two or more. But if there is not do we still remain silent? Jesus instructs when a person sins, to go to that person in private first. Then, if there is still a problem, bring one or two other people to the table of discussion. If that doesn't solve the issue, then it is to be brought before the congregation (Matt. 18:15-17). RESPONSE: This is primarily referring to a private matter between two Christians, it is not PRIMARILY addressing false teaching, though I believe Matthew 18 should also be invoked early on before the person being confronted has had a chance to spread his false gospel or teaching. But if that has already happened, it is too late for Matthew 18, at least in the sense of two individual parties resolving the offense just between the two of them, very simply because it is no longer private. And even then, it is not as though you can settle the matter as though it were a property dispute. The teaching is either true or it is false! If you are interested in the view of virtual every Conservative Scholar on this text who invoke the principles of hermeneutics that you so devoutly espouse, they confirm this to be so. Now I am surprised you would invoke Matthew 18 to me, for this is exactly what I have done in approaching Richard Foster. So why am I not talking to Richard Foster? If Richard Foster believes this passage, why isn't he responding to my further concerns and emails regarding his teaching? Why are you declaring that Richard Foster refuses to respond to the letter from Ray Yungen, who very diplomatically appealed to you to repent of your teaching, so that they could both implement Matthew 18? How is Richard Foster able to go the altar to bring a sacrifice without first making things right with his brother Ray Yungen, according to Scripture?? The Epistles contain guidance on many issues that congregations face as a body, including blatant sin and teaching false doctrine, and how to deal with them. Most of the pastoral and general epistles were written to either the pastor of a congregation or a congregation. I have gone through many of them in the Greek to find out whether the "you" in the Pastoral Epistles or the number in nouns and verbs is singular or plural. In almost every instance, they are plural. The exceptions include instruction to a particular pastor on how to deal with a situation in a church or personal advice, e.g. when Paul tells Timothy to drink a little wine for his stomach! When read in the plural, these books take on a whole different life and it changes their perspectives, particularly on issues of practice and discipline (see 1 Corinthians 5:1-12 which is written in the plural.) RESPONSE: Of course there are a host of directions to you (plural) in Greek. But what did you expect Paul to do, name each person one by one and give him the exact same instructions? This would be absurd! No each person as part of the plural you were expected to also comply with Paul's instructions unless, specifically he was identifying one individual with an instruction. As an example, there is a record of the Roman Catholic Pope kissing the Koran as a sign of ecumenism. Am I not to warn anyone that he is a false teacher until I go to him privately? Islam is responsible for more shed blood of the saints than any religion in history, rivaled only by Roman Catholicism, Islam's fellow daughter of Babylon. Are you suggesting that I must go through the Church Discipline procedure to silence the Pope? The Catholic Church would not even allow such a procedure. But it sure would be wonderful if the Church did exercise church discipline with people like this. Unfortunately, it is swiftly becoming a dinosaur (see points above where I enumerate Biblical options for who can name false teachers). I am all for Matthew 18 and I Corinthians 5:1-12. But if a teacher such as Richard Foster has already published his teachings, then the privacy component is no longer even possible, as it is obliterated by the teacher himself making his teaching public. And if the Church fails to act, we must still warn the rest of the Body of Christ. This reinforces my previous point: we always place a verse in its larger context before we determine what it says to us and the Church today. To use several Scriptures as proof texts does violence to those verses by cutting them from their contexts, thus presenting a hodge podge of guidance and instruction. (The classic joke about proof texting goes something like this: A man was having trouble in his life and in trying to decide what to do he consults the Scriptures. So he balances the Bible on its spine and removes his hands. When the Bible falls open, he reads the first passage that his eyes fall on, "Judas went out and hanged himself." Since he had decided to do the exercise several times until he got clear instruction, he again balances the Bible on its spine, letting it fall open. The next time he reads, "Go and do likewise"!) RESPONSE: I address context at length in previous paragraphs. There is no context in the Church today where divination, summoning up spirits, Eastern Meditation (opposite of Biblical meditation) is allowed. This brings us back to where we started. As you propose, is Richard Foster misleading people because he quotes Carl Jung? No. Could he have found another person to quote? Maybe. Do the quotes he uses from Carl Jung strengthen Foster's argument? Yes. Even though Jung may not have been an orthodox Christian, he recognized that the Devil can lead us astray through busyness and that all adults need to regain the imaginations they lost as their parents "civilized" them. Again I address Carl Jung extensively above and why he should not be given any credence. He particularly should not be quoted because he is one possessed by a demon, one of Satan's fallen angels. Jung and Biblical Christianity don't even share the same understanding of who the Devil is! So Christians should not gain or regain false visions that Satan would love to give them. (Is it possible that great inventors and creative artists are unique because they never lost their God-given, childhood imaginations?) Should Foster declare Thomas Merton a false teacher? No. RESPONSE: I must beseech you to tell you that is not Biblically correct! Particularly as you point out, Richard Foster has his Phd in Pastoral Theology. Pastor is another word for Overseer. And what does the Bible say about his responsibility? Elders have a greater responsibility and a stricter accounting being teachers. So, yes, Richard Foster should declare Thomas Merton a false teacher! Better yet, Richard Foster should do so from a position of repentance for his own false teaching. Here is just one Scriptural passage to verify that pastors do need to declare who is a false teacher: "Since an overseer is entrusted with God's work, he must....refute those who oppose it....they must be silenced because they are ruining whole households." Titus 1: 7-11 NIV This is the responsibility of the gathered community. RESPONSE: What gathered community? Do you mean the Church? Martin Luther did not bring the gathered community together to confront the Catholic Church. He was the lone voice, at first. But he was the one on trial. So was Martin Luther to remain silent until he could recruit more that agree with him? Indeed the local Church should ultimately act. But if it won't that does not mean we (the rest of the Body of Christ) should be silent. And who is going to gather together in a community to identify Robert Schuller as a false teacher? There may never be such a "gathered community." The Apostle Paul identified a number of false teachers without the community even gathering. One more comment. The verse you quote, Romans 16:7, "Now I beseech you, brethren (plural), mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye (plural) have learned; and avoid them" was written by Paul to the Roman church--a church meeting in homes scattered throughout the city--that needed vital instruction on how to deal with people who were teaching and doing things contrary to his teaching. This verse was not written to give individuals authority to search out anyone they think is a false teacher or a heretic or worse and then write an "expose" about that person in a book or on the web. Today is the first time in Church history when individuals have self-appointed themselves to hunt out people they have determined are unorthodox and pursue them relentlessly through various mass media until their reputations and ministries are ruined. According to the guidelines given to us by Jesus and the Epistles, today's self-appointed heresy hunters are operating outside the biblical and historical Church. RESPONSE: This is so absurd I can not even believe I am reading this. Millions of individuals throughout the history of the Church have been running for their lives because they dared to speak the truth about heresy after heresy. Countless persecuted and martyred saint's blood cries out from the ground. These people had but to remain silent, as you suggest. But thank God they did not. You need to read Fox's Book of Martyrs just for starters, then repent for having made such an irresponsible statement. The Roman Catholic Church, which you embrace in your ecumenical Renovare organization, hunted down true Christians and burned them at the stake. The Roman Catholic Church were heretic hunters, but they were the true heretics. If you are so passionately opposed to heretic hunters, then who don't you oppose the organization that is responsible for the death of more saints than any organization in history? Regarding Richard Foster, I did not have to hunt him down. The aroma of his teaching is in the air conditioning systems of thousands of churches and is coming out of the pores of where I have witnessed the saturation of Carl Jung teaching, particularly the Willowcreek Church and Association and Rick Warren's toolbox which feeds tens of thousands of churches and pastors all over the world. This leads one to ask, what if the gathered community doesn't act when a person is involved in willful sin or teaches false doctrine? As an individual, my duty is to pray about the situation and bring the issue to the community to which that person belongs if I am so led by the Holy Spirit. If the community doesn't do anything, then I avoid that person and depend on God to judge and deal with that person's actions and the inaction of the community. I know this goes against everything that the American culture and our natural impulses tell us, but we are members of the Kingdom of God with an agenda and destiny that is 180 degrees counter to the Kingdom of Man. RESPONSE: Yes there is a point where you avoid the unrepentant brother and shake the dust from your feet. But we are to never stop warning every other church about this false teacher, particularly when his or her teachings continue to be published and church after hapless church continues to import their teachings and the teacher themselves. As long as we have breath we must do this. Your idea to cease to maintain a voice is exactly what happen in the pedophile priest scandal and Cardinal Law. The given local community followed your instructions. Meanwhile the Roman Catholic Archbishop, Bernard Law simply shuffled perpetrators off to another unsuspecting parish. Besides, there is not a shred of Scriptural precedent where we are to cease warning the Church about an unrepentant false teacher. The Epistles were circulated throughout all of Christendom so that every community outside of the local gathered community would be warned, while those false teachers were alive. And they are in circulation to this day so that false teachers teaching the same ideas could be identified and marked. That is why Richard Foster must be marked and everyone warned! These ministries should be ruined. These false teachers would not have had their reputations ruined if they were not teaching ideas contrary to the Apostles Doctrine. They have only themselves to blame. Don't shoot the messenger. In closing, can I make three suggestions? 1. That you seriously consider the positive influence the writings of people like Richard Foster have had on the spiritual lives of people in conjunction with the negative impact the books and web sites that slam fellow Christians have had on people's lives. RESPONSE: I don't agree with your premise. Richard Foster's teachings are not a positive influence. They, along with Carl Jung and a host of other teachers he quotes are a Clear and Present Danger to the Church! Pray over it. Ponder it. Ask God to help you discern the answer. The criteria I use to discern the impact of a ministry is this: Does ministry help people be a "light on a hill" to the rest of the world or live the life Jesus taught, "I came that they might have life and have it more abundantly" (John 10:10)? RESPONSE: I use the same criteria and ask the same question: Does the ministry help people? But I determine whether it helps someone, not by subjective means but by testing the teaching against Scripture. I check the root systems of the teaching. A thornbush can not produce figs. You can call it a fig all you want, but it is still a thorn. I check out where did the ideas come from from the teachers of the teachers as well. If they do not speak to the Law and the Prophets, there is no light in them...not some light, not alot of light. NO LIGHT! Regarding "help"...the following Scripture capsulizes where I believe our help should come from: "I will lift up mine eyes unto the hills, from whence cometh my help. My help [cometh] from the LORD, which made heaven and earth." Psalm 121:1-2 And by the way, note once again, the eyes are OPEN! Regarding your reference to "light on a hill," it would have been very instructive for you to have quoted this entire Scriptural passage. The rest of it says: "can not be hid". "Ye are the light of the world. A city that is set on an hill cannot be hid." Matthew 5:14 So if this is true, then all of your statements to me should be a light on a hill that can not be hid. So, why would you then be so upset that I pass this light (of your statements) on to Lighthouse Trail and for "the rest of the world" to see? This doesn't make any sense...that is unless you really do have something to hide! We are certainly called to be a light on a hill, but that light must not be strange fire. WOE to any elder who inquired of your office for clarifications on Richard Foster and Renovare's teaching, who then had the audicity to share this information with the board of elders or congregation before they made a decision to invite him as a speaker or purchase any of his books. God have mercy on this person! 2. That you study the fallacies in logic. It would help you identify the numerous errors in logic that appear every day in the news media, speeches, books, and on the web. RESPONSE: Well I studied logic in college and in Missile Maintenance School (computer electronics courses required us to study logic because of logic circuits, .e.g, And, Or, Nand, Nor Gates). Let me just say one thing about the Lord's logic circuit: You cannot serve two masters! You can think what you like about my abilities in logic. But the fact remains, no Christian needs logic courses to determine if or how they are to obey clear commandments. Certainly precious few of the original disciples and early Christians had scholarly academic skills. So this is a false criteria for determining a false teacher. 3. That you take a class in Biblical Interpretation. In this course you would learn how to use Scripture correctly in order to strengthen your statements and arguments. These studies help us avoid making fools of ourselves. Though old enough to retire, I am still studying both. RESPONSE: I study the Bible and Bible Interpretation via a host of scholars by book and online at least 40 hours a week. I also run my articles by a great number of pastors and fellow scholars all over the world before I publish anything. Of course I have no problem with those who do it by taking classes. In fact many professors who teach Biblical Intepretation and related subjects at Seminaries review my commentaries and articles. Now here are my suggestions (admonitions) for you: "See to it that no one take you captive through hollow and deceptive philosophy, which depends on human tradition and the basic principles of this world rather than on Christ." Colossians 2:8 NIV "If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not take him into your house or welcome him. Anyone who welcomes him shares in his wicked work." 2 John 2:10 NIV "So then, brothers, stand firm and hold to the teachings we passed on to you whether by word of mouth of by letter." "If anyone does not obey our instruction in this letter, take special note of him in order that he may feel ashamed." II Thessalonians 2:13, 3:14 NIV I appeal to you and Richard Foster to repent of and renounce your false teachings and no longer be partners with them and share in their sins. Please find enclosed my response to Lynda Graybeal's September 24, 2003 Letter. Again, her statements are in black, my responses in blue font.
Dear James, When Richard received your first letter and I received your second, we thought you were wanting to open an honest and transparent private dialogue about the issues of Christian belief, faith, and practice that you raised. RESPONSE: So where was I dishonest? You presented yourself as a spokesperson for Richard Foster. I was clear on who I was. And when you asked what my motivation was, I answered you straight away! As President of Rock Salt Publishing, which has published discernment articles all over the world and the internet, what do you suppose my intent was? You already did your own search on the internet to find me, so there is nothing that is not transparent about who I am or what I do. What did you expect that I would do? If your statements do not represent your public or published position(s), then it is your responsiblity to so state and or refrain from disseminating them to me. So what do you want to do, now retract something you said? If it is the truth, why would you be so angry for the whole world to even know? You also had no problem venting your opinions about a number of other people in your correspondence without discussing them with those parties. Do you want to talk about honest. Honesty would be to not pass yourself off as a Christian, or your teachings as Christian, when they clearly are not. Honesty would be answering "Yes" to the quotes of Richard Foster on Lighthouse Trails and not "No" as Richard Foster did through your correspondence to me. Then I was able to confirm that those quotes are true and verified on other sites which simply quoted them from Richard's books. Honesty would be to tell every Church that these teachings are not in the Bible or are forbidden in the Bible BEFORE they invite Richard Foster to speak there. Honesty would be not finding some obscure quote from a false teacher who happens to say something that is true, then obscure the greater reality of Satanic belief systems people like Carl Jung adherred to. This is deception of the highest order. Now I find that you set us up and forwarded our private correspondence to Ray Yungen. RESPONSE: You defame Ray Yungen and Lighthouse Trails to me and expect me to remain silent and not inform them? There was nothing in your previous correspondence to indicate that it was private or confidential, and no reason to even suspect that it might be as though you were a patient of a physician, or your medical records. Shame on you. RESPONSE: Well there is certainly plenty of shame to go around with the number of teachers promoting Eastern Meditation mysticism in the Church but calling it Biblical Meditation. Let me tell you what I am not ashamed of, that is the Gospel of Jesus Christ which is the power to save me from the wrath of God. The one who should be ashamed is the one who is promoting false teachings. Of this I am sure! I will only be ashamed if I remain silent and refrain from exposing the deeds of darkness to the whole church and reproving anyone that promotes Carl Jung or another gospel, particularly when done in the guise of Christianity. I know that you think that this should be the end of the matter. But I am constrained by Scripture to inform Lighthouse Trails of your teachings as well as warn a great number of discernment ministries around the world, pastors, and individuals. You can tell Ray that Richard Foster will not read his letter that he will not get a response from Richard because we refuse to participate in these unethical and unChristian actions. RESPONSE: When right confronts wrong, and wrong does not repent, wrong always retaliates! So you are going to disobey Matthew 18 when a brother has an offense against you. Even if Ray Yungen is wrong, then it becomes your responsiblity to confront him for his wrong doing so that he may be corrected. You who are such a passionate defender of Matthew 18, would now obliterate the process? Ray Yungen and I have followed the initial steps of Matthew 18 with Richard Foster, and he still has not repented or received correction. So since you are so eager to pursue Matthew 18, the next step would be to take it before his church. So why don't you tell us the name of his church so that we can consummate this process? And why don't you tell us the name of your church too so that we can obey Matthew 18 with you as well? With everything you have accused me of, I would happily comply with having you bring me before the counsels of the community, so long as I am able to present all of my findings to defend myself. And like the Apostle Paul and Martin Luther, would even appeal for the opportunity to be tried and/or to publically debate and defend my case as well as your personal charges against me. When did it become unethical to publically expose false teachers? Shout it from the rooftops! Another footnote on what you think is unethical. If I were one of many elders in a church or groups of churches simply testing the spirits and examining the teaching of Richard Foster because our church was thinking about bringing him in as a speaker, then I learn some troubling things he or you, as his spokesperson (Lynda), tell me about this person's teaching, wouldn't it be not only unethical, but unbiblical to not discuss with the rest of the elders who would make this decision to keep this information to myself...and simply allow this teaching into the church for multitudes to hear and adhere to? Even if your statements regarding his teaching were all correct and biblical, they might be very helpful to giving further insight into the man Richard Foster to help us focus the elders and congregation? I write articles that are reprinted in other discernment journals and newsletters that go out to thousands of pastors and missionaries around the world who want a multitude of godly counsel and want to draw from those who have the gift of discernment of spirits in order to protect and warn the sheep of their folds. They are right to do this. So there is nothing unethical about it whatsover, not to do so would be a dereliction of duty and quite simply irresponsible. I will continue to be so constrained to warn them all about the teachings of Richard Foster, as will all of the other discernment ministries listed at the end of this letter. And by the way, I agree with Ray Yungen's correcting you in his letter to you regarding your false definition of the word "disciple." Well he was right and you were wrong! Instead of retaliating, why can't you humble yourself and admit you were wrong? I now also have both a right and moral obligation to respond to your charges that my practices are unethical and unChristian, and will so inform everyone that I submit my articles to. At the end of this document is a copy of the Ray Yungen Letter to Richard Foster which Richard Foster via his colleague Lynda Graybeal indicates their refusal to respond. Regarding your term "slamming" a Christian. I believe that you are "slamming" people like Al Dager, Ray Yungen, or me for that matter. Scriptures
which authorize rebuking (which you probably would construe as
"slamming" a Christian): 1Timothy 5:20 Them that sin rebuke before all, that others also may fear. Titus 1:13 This witness is true. Wherefore rebuke them sharply, that they may be sound in the faith; Titus 2:15 These things speak, and exhort, and rebuke with all authority. Let no man despise thee. 2 Timothy 4:2 Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine. Proverbs 28:23 He that rebuketh a man afterwards shall find more favour than he that flattereth with the tongue. Proverbs 27:5 Open rebuke [is] better than secret love. 2Ti
2:17 "And their word will eat as doth a canker: of whom
is Hymenaeus and 1Jo 4:5-6 "They are of the world: therefore speak they of the world, and the world heareth them. We are of God: he that knoweth God heareth us; he that is not of God heareth not us. Hereby know we the spirit of truth, and the spirit of error." 2Jo 1:10 "If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into [your] house, neither bid him God speed:" 2Jo 1:11 "For he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds." 1Jo 4:1 "Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world." Upon inquiring of the various ministries and individuals who have challenged or opposed Richard Foster and many other Christian leaders and psychologists, I learned that these Christians who were simply trying to be good Bereans in searching the Scriptures to see if these things be so, have often been accused of: SLAMMING, attacking a brother or sister in the Lord, bashing, smearing, touching God's anointed, not following Matthew 18, etc. It is getting to the point that even with the meekest and gentlest and kindest of voices you cannot correct or reprove a Christian leader. I am desperate to know if there is ever any situation in which these people think that correcting, opposing, rebuking, rebuking sharply, reproving, warning, silencing voices which ruin whole households, entreating, bringing an accusation against an elder with two or more witnesses, taking a brother before the entire church, turning a brother over to Satan, calling for repentance, admonishing, warning, appealing, expelling, which are all verbs the Apostle Paul used, is NOT harming these great leaders or tearing down the Church, but actually helping them and the church? Is there one person that this was done to in which they believed the action helped the person vs. destroying them and ruining their ministry and reputation as they allege? You would think that correcting a brother is somehow cursing a brother! Why is it when a pastor or famous Christian psychologist or pastor can do any of the above verbs and that is considered commendable, but when a brother does it to an elder they are reprobate? As for myself, I do not wish to malign or harm Richard Foster in any way. But for me to remain silent in face of his published teaching, I would be harming him as well as those he teaches and claims he his helping. Richard Foster is also harming himself by resisting correction and not amending his published teaching on Prayer Centering and giving credence to Carl Jung, Thomas Merton, Agnes Sanford, and Thomas Keating. I pray that he heeds this counsel for his own good as well as for the good of God's people! Finally, as the Apostle Paul said, I am therefore now the enemy because I tell you the truth?
Bill Hybel's Willowcreek Church & Association http://www.willowcreek.org (7,000+ churches and pastors worldwide)
Finally.....This
is not a person's name: Lecto Divina & Centering, promoted
by Richard Foster in his book, Spiritual Classics.
RENOVARE ***The is only a partial list as there are thousands of other churches, schools, and missionary organizations who promote or implement Richard Fosters teachings.
CHRISTIAN RESEARCH NETWORK
October 6, 2003 “I want to assure you, for what it’s worth, that I bear Richard Foster no personal animosity. My reason for writing this testimony is that with the rising tide of critical input my book may bring I want to clarify why I am doing this type of activity. It has come to my attention that some view the current controversy regarding Richard Foster as stemming from a misunderstanding of his statement “we of the new age” in the first edition of Celebration of Discipline. This is not the case. The real issue lies in his statement where he encourages, “we should all, without shame, enroll as apprentices in the school of contemplative prayer,” and also in his statement that “Christianity is not complete without the contemplative dimension.” It is from these comments and this viewpoint that opposition to Foster flows. If he were to understand why this is so, his sense of having his reputation falsely impaired would be greatly tempered. In Portland, Oregon there is a very large bookstore called New Renaissance Books. It is entirely devoted to New Age spirituality. Every Eastern mystical and metaphysical topic under the sun is found there. Interestingly enough, there is quite a sizable section devoted to contemplative prayer with Thomas Merton having a whole shelf devoted just to him. Why would a bookstore of this nature devote valuable space to a topic that purports to be Christian? That is, from my perspective, a legitimate question. May I suggest the reason is that the Christian mystical tradition shares a sense of profound kinship with the Eastern mystical tradition. I believe there is ample evidence to back this claim up. Look at the following quotes from leading contemplative figures; the answer is inescapable. 1. Thomas Merton: “I think I couldn’t understand Christian teaching the way I do if it were not in the light of Buddhism.”1 Richard Foster Promoting Eastern Mysticism By Proxy by Ray Yungen 2. Henri Nouwen: Nouwen wrote that his solitude and the solitude of his Buddhist friends, would “greet each other and support each other.”2 3. Basil Pennington: “We should not hesitate to take the fruit of the age old wisdom of the East and ‘capture’ it for Christ. Indeed, those of us who are in ministry should make the necessary effort to acquaint ourselves with as many of these Eastern techniques as possible … 3 4. Morton Kelsey: “You can find most of the New Age practices in the depth of Christianity [Christian church tradition].”4 5. Tilden Edwards: “This mystical stream [contemplative prayer] is the Western bridge to Far Eastern spirituality.”5 6. Alice Bailey: “None other than Alice Bailey, the famous occult prophetess who coined the term New Age, made this startling pronouncement: ‘It is, of course, easy to find many passages which link the way of the Christian Knower [mystic] with that of his brother in the East. They bear witness to the same efficacy of method.’”6 7. In The Lay Contemplative fourteen centers listed in the back of the book openly proclaim their Hindu-Buddhist connections, including Shalem Prayer Institute. I could easily provide page after page of similar quotes from numerous contemplative sources. That is why New Renaissance Books features a section on contemplative prayer. That is why opposition from others and myself has come forth. There is no misconstruing of realities here. Tilden Edwards knew what he was saying when he said that contemplative prayer is the Western bridge to Far Eastern spirituality. To put it in a nutshell, I believe Richard Foster advocates a prayer movement that indeed can be proven to have strong links to Eastern mysticism. And incidentally, this prayer method does not have its origins with the Desert Fathers, as some believe, but rather dates back much further, probably as far back as the early days of mankind. To proclaim to be evangelical in every aspect but to say, “Thomas Merton tried to awaken God’s people” as Foster said personally to me at a conference in November of 1994 is a contradiction of major proportions. It is an oxymoron to try to lump Biblical evangelicalism and Thomas Merton together. To list in the back of Celebration of Discipline Tilden Edward’s book, Spiritual Friend, as an “excellent book on spirituality” is unthinkable.7 Tilden Edwards sees no problem mixing Christianity and Buddhism. Yet the Apostle Paul says you can’t sit at both tables. It cannot be done. To do that is to abandon Jesus Christ. So someone who understands the preaching of the Cross would never be comfortable promoting someone who believes as Tilden Edwards does, especially in print. If one really does believe in a Biblical evangelical statement of faith, [such as Foster’s] then wouldn’t that person be repelled by such compromise? And to say the least, wouldn’t it certainly draw a lot of confusion to those that recognize this? If someone with a public profile ardently promotes another person, such as when Foster says Thomas Merton has “priceless wisdom”8 for the spiritual life of the Christian, won’t those listening think he approves of or at the very least overlooks Merton’s serious heretical stands and perhaps then desire to follow Merton, thus possibly falling into Merton’s spiritual errors? If Foster could put himself in the shoes of we who are confused by his position, surely he can understand why we see such a contradiction. I once heard a pastor quote Woody Allen saying that he (Woody) wasn’t afraid to die; he just didn’t want to be there when it happened. For someone to make an issue with this pastor, because he used a quote from Woody Allen, would be ludicrous because that is simply guilt by association. But if the same pastor, in a serious tone, said that Woody Allen had great spiritual understanding and everyone should listen to him to gain insight, that no longer is benign, and it now becomes guilt by promotion—two different terms with two significantly different principles. Guilt by association is weak; guilt by promotion is strong. May I briefly address just three more points? The comment made that Lighthouse Trails Publishing erroneously labeled Foster a disciple of Thomas Merton because he never met him personally is not accurate, and here is why. In checking with two prominent dictionaries, the word disciple does mean anyone who is an adherent of someone’s teachings or school of religion. (American Heritage Dictionary and Webster’s) According to both of these reliable resources, personal contact is not a stipulation. The fact that Foster quotes Merton 13 times in the latest edition of Celebration of Discipline is just further proof that he does indeed adhere to Merton’s teachings. And we could list a number of other references to back up that assertion. I would like to also make an observation about the view that the New Age movement is only a few decades old. The term itself may indeed be fairly recent but the actual practices and beliefs involved are thousands of years old. For instance, the slave girl mentioned in Acts 16 was in effect a New Ager. The term itself was taken from astrology making reference to the Aquarian age in which humanity is supposedly going to realize its inner divinity. Hence, anyone who engages in these mystical practices is associated with this view, even though they may have lived centuries ago. It’s not the term; it’s the practices that are at issue here. Since Thomas Merton and Henri Nouwen mystically perceived the divine in everyone this in effect made them New Agers. Frankly, but respectfully, we see Foster as someone who is promoting Eastern mysticism by way of proxy9 and he is apparently afraid to come out of the mystical closet. His affinity with those who clearly stand for heretical and non-biblical approaches to God, however, are opening that closet door. In Christ,
(Footnotes)
|